RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.newsmax.com/john-gizzi/joe-biden-vladimir-putin-propaganda/2022/09/12/id/1087015/

Nearly 20 months after Joe Biden became president, the area of public diplomacy — that is, using television, radio, digital venues, and other means of communication on the international front — is almost completely unused, grossly underfunded, and neglected.

This is happening at a turbulent time in the world. In March, Russian President Vladimir Putin increased the state media budget to 211 billion rubles (roughly $2.8 billion) — a 34 billion-ruble ($460 million) increase from earlier years — to spend on propaganda to win and enhance support at home for his war on Ukraine.

It is difficult to gauge the overall amount China is spending on propaganda. It has been estimated that $6.6 billion has come out of Beijing since 2009 to accentuate the Chinese media presence worldwide and to sculpt, as Raksha Kumar wrote for Thomson Reuters, “a sophisticated strategy to portray the country’s leadership in a good light.”

Further, Chinese foreign agent spending has skyrocketed from just over $10 million in 2016 to nearly $64 million last year, according to the Center for Responsible Politics.

In the U.S., public diplomacy, funded at $701 million, is funded at a microcosm of the overall State Department budget — just 1.16% of $60.4 billion, according to the budget for the Fiscal Year 2023.

But while the $701 million figure may sound impressive, the 1995 budget for the U.S. Information Agency (which then had exclusive oversight over public diplomacy) was $1.4 billion. Adjusted for inflation, that figure today would be $2.72 billion.

When USIA disappeared in 1999, Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and their sister media became free-standing. All the rest of Public Diplomacy disappeared into the State Department.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/09/bidens_illegal_migrant_surge_costs_taxpayers_204_billion_a_year_study.html

As if inflation brought on by government overspending weren’t high enough already, a new study shows that Joe Biden’s illegal migrant surge is costing taxpayers $20.4 billion a year, or $9,232 for each illegal migrant.

According to Fox News:

FIRST ON FOX: The number of illegal immigrants who entered the U.S. since President Biden took office will cost the U.S. taxpayer over $20 billion each year, according to a new analysis by a hawkish immigration group.

The study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which advocates for lower levels of immigration overall, calculates that the illegal immigrants who have entered the U.S. since Jan. 2021 will add an extra $20.4 billion burden a year, in addition to the $140 billion existing illegal immigrants already cost.

The analysis is based on an estimated 1.3 million released into the U.S. by immigration officials, as well as approximately one million “gotaways” — or illegal immigrants who have slipped past overwhelmed agents. FAIR calculates that each illegal immigrants costs $9,232 a year to support.

Some two million migrants have come on in at Biden’s incentivization of illegal entry, flooding cities such as El Paso, which has now been described by locals as looking like “a third world country,” according to the New York Post. Biden’s catch and release policies of unvetted migrants into the country has created a disaster for U.S. national security, imported third world crime, and created a huge burden for U.S. taxpayers, who are already burdened by Biden’s multiple government spending packages, all of which create inflation.

The $20.4 billion figure, times four years of Joe Biden’s presidency, would bring the migrant total cost to $81.6 billion for the taxpayers which is well more than the $62.5 billion that Joe Biden has shipped to Ukraine to help that country protect its borders.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/09/12/bidens-doj-doesnt-want-to-disclose-classified-mar-a-lago-documents-except-through-selective-leaks-to-leftist-media/

The government’s latest motion strongly suggests the Biden administration is all-in on pursuing a criminal case against the former president.

Hiding behind the horror of 9/11, the Biden administration demands that a federal judge and the country trust its targeting of a top political opponent—all while leaking details of classified documents to a pliant press.

This development and six others flow from recent court filings in former President Donald Trump’s efforts to obtain a special master’s oversight of the FBI’s seizure of thousands of documents and personal effects from his Mar-a-Lago home. The government doesn’t want to allow an independent review of the documents it’s seized. Trump’s legal team does.

First, The Backdrop

Three days after the August 8, 2022, raid on Trump’s Florida home, an attorney representing the former president spoke with Jay Bratt, the chief of the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. Bratt has apparently been leading the investigation into the former president.

Trump’s lawyer asked Bratt “to agree to the appointment of a Special Master to protect the integrity of privileged documents.” Bratt refused. A week-and-a-half later, Trump filed a separate action in a Florida district court seeking judicial oversight and the appointment of a special master.

Federal judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, granted that motion last week, holding a special master shall be appointed to review the seized property, “manage assertions of privilege and make recommendations thereon, and evaluate claims for return of property.” Significantly, Judge Cannon also entered an injunction prohibiting the government from using the documents “for criminal investigative purposes pending resolution of the special master’s review process.” The court then ordered the parties to recommend individuals to fill the special master role, along with proposed procedures for the process by last Friday.

https://johnkassnews.com/the-scream-pritzker-lightfoot-and-their-great-unraveling/

There is nothing that curdles the fortunes of Gov. JB Pritzker and his ally Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot quite like the scream. It exposes them for what they’ve done.

It is a woman’s scream, a real scream of fear that was randomly captured the other day on a Ring doorbell security camera as she was attacked, pulled to the ground, and robbed by thugs as she walked on a beautiful Sunday afternoon in Chicago’s “mostly peaceful” and leafy Lakeview neighborhood.

Within that scream of terror hides another, buried sound, part of what the writer Matt Rosenberg, senior editor at wirepoints.org, brilliantly calls “the great unravelling.”

It is the sigh of a once-great but thoroughly exhausted city, a Chicago bone-tired, spent by decades of political corruption, hammered by the brutal application of race card politics in a city of tribes, and in 2020 Lightfoot’s City Hall failed miserably to stop the riots and looting that grew out of the George Floyd protests, and then Lightfoot endorsed the Soros-backed State’s Attorney Kim Foxx for re-election.

It is a city drained by street gang violence and political indifference, where police have been weakened and demoralized, even as private security forces crop up, paid for by those with means who demand protection. In this, Chicago is like Rome.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18905/executive-privilege-trump

[L]et’s see how this would have played out if the shoe were on the other foot.

What if Obama was called by a congressional committee to turn over all internal communications— written and oral— regarding his decision, and he claimed executive privilege? And what if then President Trump waived Obama’s privilege?

One thing we know to be certain: many of the academic “experts” and media “pundits” who now support the argument that an incumbent president can waive the executive privilege of his predecessor would be making exactly the opposite argument. They would be saying— as I am saying now— that presidents would be reluctant to have confidential communications with their aides if they knew these communications could be made public by their successor in order to gain partisan electoral advantage. It would essentially mark the end of executive privilege, which is rooted in Article II of the Constitution.

Accurate predictions today require us to know which persons or parties will be helped or hurt by particular outcomes. Hypocrisy reigns. And those who engage in it are not even embarrassed when their double standards are exposed. The current “principle” is that the ends justify the means, especially if the end is the end of Trump.

“Because we can” has become the current mantra of both parties. Neutral principles, which apply equally without regard to partisan advantage, is for wimps, not party leaders or other government officials. “They do it too” has become the excuse de jure. Both parties do it, but that is not a valid excuse even in hardball politics. Two constitutional violations do not cancel each other. They only make things worse.

Executive privilege is important to both parties — and to the constitutional rule of law. Today’s partisan victory for Democrats if their waiver argument is accepted, will soon become their loss, should Republicans take control.

So beware of what you wish for. Today’s dream may well become tomorrow’s nightmare.